the one posted in the hill is actually pretty good. Congratulations! Not exactly the way I would have done it but not bad. It does indeed find a significant positive relationship between face masks and the number of cases. However don't be so quick to dismiss the doubters. If you read the lit review there is alot of generally weak evidence. Below is a snippet...
Researchers have been reviewing evidence from previous randomized controlled trials for other respiratory illnesses examining mask use and types among individuals at higher risk of contracting infections (such as health care workers or individuals in infected households). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of such studies have provided suggestive, although generally weak, evidence.6 The estimates from the meta-analyses based on the randomized controlled trials suggest declines in transmission risk of influenza or influenza-like illnesses to mask wearers, although estimates are mostly statistically insignificant possibly due to small sample sizes or design limitations especially related to assessing compliance.7–9 There is also a relationship between increased adherence to mask use specifically and effectiveness of reducing transmission to mask wearers; in one randomized study of influenza transmission in infected households in Australia, transmission risk for mask wearers was lower with greater adherence.10 Further, the evidence is mixed from randomized studies on types of masks and risk of influenza-like illnesses transmission to mask wearers; for example, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis comparing N95 respirators versus surgical masks found a statistically insignificant decline in influenza risk with the N95-respirators.11
So overall masks may indeed be effective but there is still room for doubt.
